FCC votes in favor of pay-for-priority internet fast lanes

This site may earn affiliate commissions from the links on this page. Terms of use.

Updated @ 11:40am: The FCC has voted 3-2 in favor of a new proposal that would allow for the creation of internet fast lanes, where edge service providers (Netflix, YouTube, etc.) could pay broadband/cable companies for priority traffic. It’s important to note that this is just a proposal — the public will now be allowed to comment, before the FCC enacts the final ruling later in the year. FCC chairman Tom Wheeler seemed quite insistent that the new proposal would not squeeze out the little players, and that fast lanes will only be made available when they are “reasonable.”

Updated @ 1:30pm: It’s also worth noting that none of Wheeler’s comments suggest that he’s in favor of prioritization or fast lanes. Most of his comments strongly suggest that he opposes any kind of segregation of the internet, into a slow internet and a fast internet. But as always with politics, it can be hard to separate what is being said — to please the consumer/voter — from what will actually be done.

Original story: Later today, Thursday, the US’s Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will vote on a new net-neutrality Open Internet proposal. This proposal (which still hasn’t been publicly released) was originally full of language that would allow ISPs to set up internet “fast lanes,” forcing service providers (such as Netflix or Skype) to pay for traffic priority — a barbed dagger in the heart of net neutrality. A couple of days ago, though, responding to a tsunami of criticism, FCC chairman Tom Wheeler revised the proposal to ban some types of fast lane — such as ISPs prioritizing traffic from their own subsidiaries — but not others. As it stands, it’s very unclear what the FCC will actually be voting on later today — but it does seem almost certain that the new Open Internet Order will contain some provision for pay-for-priority fast lanes. Where does this leave the internet and net neutrality? Is there anything we can do to stop the FCC and its kowtow to capitalism?

Back in 2010, the previous incarnation of the FCC, helmed by Julius Genachowski, enacted the FCC Open Internet Order 2010. This first Order didn’t quite declare that ISPs (internet service providers) were common carriers — i.e. dumb pipes, like a mail courier or telephone company, that must transport everything you give to them without messing with the contents — but it did outlaw pay-for-play fast lanes. Verizon challenged this order, and in January 2014 the US Court of Appeals struck down some of the order. The FCC has since gone back to the drawing board to work up a new Open Internet Order, and that’s what’s being voted on today.

Here you can see the old 2010 FCC panel, which tried to outlaw internet fast lanes, but didn’t quite get there; its Open Internet Order was partially struck down in January 2014.

Verizon argued that the 2010 Order was too strict and failed to provide valid legal reasoning for “the anti-discrimination and anti-blocking rules” — and the court agreed. To impose such strict regulations, the FCC would have to reclassify ISPs as common carriers. But the FCC, for fairly mysterious reasons, doesn’t want to do that.

If ISPs were classified as common carriers, they would essentially be held to the same standards and regulations as a copper-line telephone company (telco). Each ISP would have to provide an internet connection to your home or office that gracefully and reliably interconnects with other ISP networks. It would be the ISP’s responsibility to ensure that your connection to other parts of the internet — including services like Netflix or YouTube — are unaffected. Imagine if your telco tried to charge you extra for the ability to make calls during peak hours, or to guarantee that your calls won’t be randomly dropped.

That’s essentially what Verizon, Comcast, and Time Warner are trying to do with pay-for-priority fast lanes: It wants to charge web services (like Google) a fee for priority access to its network. Google would have to pay this fee, or risk the cable company throttling its traffic, ruining the service. (Users, of course, would just think that it’s Google being slow, not Verizon or Comcast.)

So, why won’t the FCC step up to the plate and classify ISPs as common carriers? No one’s really sure. The carriers would be incredibly upset, of course, and would raise legal and public relations hell against the FCC. The more cynical view is that the FCC chairman, Tom Wheeler — who used to lobby for the telecoms industry — is just looking out for his old buddies at the cable companies.

As for whether there’s anything you can do to help US net neutrality, your best bet is probably contacting Congress and asking them to come down on the FCC like a ton of bricks. StopTheSlowLane makes the process of contacting Congress very easy — and, for website owners, it also provides a fun piece of JavaScript (pictured above) that simulates what the internet might be like if the FCC approves the creation of internet fast lanes (and thus slow lanes as well). Fight for the Future has some more info and a petition that you can sign, too.

What we probably need is a big SOPA-style internet blackout, with all of the big boys — Google, Facebook, Netflix, etc. — coordinating to show the internet what it would be like if internet access was suddenly reduced to circa-1998 56k dial-up speeds. As yet, no such blackout is planned — but that could all change, following the FCC’s vote later today.

Tagged In

This site may earn affiliate commissions from the links on this page. Terms of use.

ExtremeTech Newsletter

Subscribe Today to get the latest ExtremeTech news delivered right to your inbox.

Email

This newsletter may contain advertising, deals, or affiliate links. Subscribing to a newsletter indicates your consent to our
Terms of Use and
Privacy Policy. You may unsubscribe from the newsletter at any time.